Arsenal/Burnley

[cwyeary]

So Im at a loss at how Kai Havertz didn't receive a red from Tierney straight away. Im beyond baffled that the VAR cleared it.

Anyone else see it differently?

 

[Paul_10]

Sympathy for the VAR here as it's one of those the ref has got such a good view and given a yellow, it will just feel like re refereeing. It's not the most forceful challenge but it is high and it's from behind with no attempt for the ball.

 

[RustyRef]

It's a red card but it came very soon after the head of PGMOL publicly chucked a referee under the bus for a decision that wasn't really wrong. That is almost certainly going to subconsciously play on the minds of the officials. They just don't know where they stand and I'm really starting to wonder whether Howard Webb is good at managing up but not down.

 

[FinalWhistle]

It does look like a red to me. Perhaps there wasn't enough force in the contact to trigger a red?

 

[es1]

Utterly staggering - its a crystal clear red

 

[ChopChop]

It very much looked like a red card to me. Some folk over in the social media cesspit (AKA X/Twitter) are suggesting that it lacked force.

 

[Kent Ref]

I've always found the term "endangers the safety" to be very subjective.

Red cards for this offence have escalated beyond belief in the modern game.

The fouled player didn't appear to suffer any injury at all. Lucky?

 

[RefereeX]

It does lack force but the point of contact combined with the fact it comes from behind so the player has no opportunity to prepare for that contact makes me arrive at red.

 

[Archer]

Gonna make my 26/27 resolution to just post one-word answers in this section. So here we go, from now on:

Red.

 

[BCMilan]

Gonna make my 26/27 resolution to just post one-word answers in this section. So here we go, from now on:

Red.

Orange

 

[Ori]

Looked red to me. Even though it wasn’t with a lot of force.

 

[Gabriel]

The ref cam footage from this game (including the challenge) is now online and I do think that the angle Paul Tierney has means it's very understandable that he goes yellow, as there is almost no intensity at all in the challenge. For me, it's just on the right side of reckless vs excessive force/endangering the safety to be yellow instead of red.

(incident from about 0:50 below):

 

[Archer]

The ref cam footage from this game (including the challenge) is now online and I do think that the angle Paul Tierney has means it's very understandable that he goes yellow, as there is almost no intensity at all in the challenge. For me, it's just on the right side of reckless vs excessive force/endangering the safety to be yellow instead of red.

(incident from about 0:50 below):

Massively eye-opening, with that view and at that (lack of) speed/force.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

Massively eye-opening, with that view and at that (lack of) speed/force.

This has been another one-word answer in this thread, brought to you by @Archer

 

[bester]

"Kai, you've not gone for there ball" "there's no intent".

Hmm, what was he trying to do then?

 

[Archer]

This has been another one-word answer in this thread, brought to you by @Archer

Starting 1st June (or whenever I register for 26/27)

 

[ARF]

"there's no intent".

At no point was this said...

 

[RefereeX]

"Kai, you've not gone for there ball" "there's no intent - city 2 it".

At no point was this said...

Fixed

 

[ARF]

Fixed

Ugh, someone's always got to bring City up don't they?

 

[bester]

Fixed

In fairness I've never heard intensity pronounced for eloquent diction, I stopped listening after he said intent